Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david
From: david@ssc-vax.UUCP (David Norris)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: rat experiment
Message-ID: <629@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Nov-83 12:40:19 EST
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.629
Posted: Mon Nov 21 12:40:19 1983
Date-Received: Wed, 23-Nov-83 04:34:48 EST
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 21


> Who has advocated eating our young?  Who has advocated weekly street fights?
>Homosexuality as a form of birth control is preferable to these methods because
> under the former no currently existing people are harmed in any way.  If you
> are concerned about the "rights" of a non-existent zygote, you have carried
> the abortion debate a little bit too far.  Why don't you rant this way about
> people who advocate the rhythm method or other forms of contraception?  Your
> argument is equally valid concerning those.

    Have you forgotten your original article?  I guess I don't understand why
you cited the "rat experiment" (which I would still like to know more about)
in the first place.  Were you simply trying to explain possible causes for
homosexuality?  If so, then forgive me for dragging you into an existing
debate.  If, however, you were attempting to justify homosexuality as a means
of birth control (as it appeared), then why cite the rat experiment as 
justification, and then mention the other disgusting aspects of the experiment?
The rats eating their young did not help the homosexuality case; although I
agree with a fellow in another article who warned against drawing such parallels
from rats to humans.  More on this in another article.
    At any rate, the discussion concerns the nature of homosexuality, NOT
birth control/abortion/right-to-life/etc.